Received: by 2002:a25:6193:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp2357954ybb; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 04:08:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsSMgAjnToJzTTtCGH+en7lIlI37qKO7jYwxNDQYmqimRVNfymGjodR2rWJ1LySUx8Dm5jD X-Received: by 2002:aca:5c44:: with SMTP id q65mr1170566oib.139.1585307306051; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 04:08:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1585307306; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=PvHCV4+BoplUcoWNNiQ+VCe1QwxClSzrpCpRpIZgptECX1OI+/fo1/d4Y+N0cJi6/R 8sw0jkR4B+CdM0S81eWboaxkolumaD/IflGbJR8w3RTNa46hboshTfVOvPAobppLq3Fe X5LfqNrCrCJ/fbY5hu0rMzPU+Jw/JqMXLEqHxpxPtCzEul7rKprwX5o62O9cthHRx9f5 Sopqdmj9SK0U8Y8lfl0X3XGavMFsiu517TeC6zHEoQPIy012WF9Pfl+iOVnHGk69zvl/ xjMiVSyF7GKboc9M13psWfE74CjSS06xvtV8f1vaNMGOn4w7/0x7gFFe4kGa6O1C+553 Z4kQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=zgh5srOn0aE4xRB41BjQdbjrTHfwpJ4eGB78m0j6bQs=; b=mRJieMr3G+rXejgjn23S4YzDD73vVy/I8CMGLi3eEmcSWleqh7hagF0gNlnXQk5diF HpB67jEqSjceXwrzu2eR13S7DTld4FjmYW7momnQC6Zw6aSDIUI2LmOhTKb12bbx8H9+ 3QNPiR8XXdNPR/od5IPN1K7bJx9KnJBvkqtVC5x7iBkgz1MBb7hG5QZyhGqPTd3MnCB5 Hx6dX0Qe8CQc0d9hDmIULn93KYFY+nBDoUivWNQvvQBC7tVPXOFNXkN6qxk09E/+Dg9a Z7Qw8l4HhePvsjljORpTDIpRZvoSlPwQL8ra3S6s1VGbO+gusvLbvf+S2EGehQpRWkJH Yciw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v127si2308134oib.25.2020.03.27.04.08.12; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 04:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727173AbgC0LHT (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 07:07:19 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:53037 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726275AbgC0LHP (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 07:07:15 -0400 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jHmpD-0004W4-L3; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:06:55 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA5991040BD; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:06:44 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Boqun Feng , peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, pkondeti@codeaurora.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, pavel@ucw.cz, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, mojha@codeaurora.org, jkosina@suse.cz, mingo@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:smp/hotplug] cpu/hotplug: Abort disabling secondary CPUs if wakeup is pending In-Reply-To: <20200327025311.GA58760@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <1559536263-16472-1-git-send-email-pkondeti@codeaurora.org> <20200327025311.GA58760@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:06:44 +0100 Message-ID: <874kuaxdiz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Boqun Feng writes: > From the commit message, it makes sense to add the pm_wakeup_pending() > check if freeze_secondary_cpus() is used for system suspend. However, > freeze_secondary_cpus() is also used in kexec path on arm64: Bah! > kernel_kexec(): > machine_shutdown(): > disable_nonboot_cpus(): > freeze_secondary_cpus() > > , so I wonder whether the pm_wakeup_pending() makes sense in this > situation? Because IIUC, in this case we want to reboot the system > regardlessly, the pm_wakeup_pending() checking seems to be inappropriate > then. Fix below. Thanks, tglx 8<------------ --- a/include/linux/cpu.h +++ b/include/linux/cpu.h @@ -133,12 +133,18 @@ static inline void get_online_cpus(void) static inline void put_online_cpus(void) { cpus_read_unlock(); } #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP_SMP -extern int freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary); +int __freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary, bool suspend); +static inline int freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary) +{ + return __freeze_secondary_cpus(primary, true); +} + static inline int disable_nonboot_cpus(void) { - return freeze_secondary_cpus(0); + return __freeze_secondary_cpus(0, false); } -extern void enable_nonboot_cpus(void); + +void enable_nonboot_cpus(void); static inline int suspend_disable_secondary_cpus(void) { --- a/kernel/cpu.c +++ b/kernel/cpu.c @@ -1200,7 +1200,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_up); #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP_SMP static cpumask_var_t frozen_cpus; -int freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary) +int __freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary, bool suspend) { int cpu, error = 0; @@ -1225,7 +1225,7 @@ int freeze_secondary_cpus(int primary) if (cpu == primary) continue; - if (pm_wakeup_pending()) { + if (suspend && pm_wakeup_pending()) { pr_info("Wakeup pending. Abort CPU freeze\n"); error = -EBUSY; break;